Second  Appendix  to  Catalogue  of  the 
Verestchagin  Exhibition 


REALISM. 


VASSILI  VERESTCHAGIN. 


The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts, 

OF 

PHILADELPHIA. 


The  Artist  is  indebted  for  the  translation  of  this 
pamphlet  to  the  kindness  of  his  friend , 

MRS.  MACGAHAN . 


Second  Appendix  to  Catalogue  of  the 
Verestchagin  Exhibition . 


REALISM. 


The  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the  Fine  Arts, 

OF 

PHILADELPHIA. 


1889. 


Copyright,  1888,  by 
AMERICAN  ART  ASSOCIATION. 


REALISM. 


EALISM — realism  !  ”  How  very  often  do 
we  hear  this  term,  and  yet  how  seldom 
does  it  appear  to  be  applied  understand- 
ingly. 

“  What  do  you  take  realism  to  be  ?  ”  I  asked  a 
well  educated  lady  in  Berlin,  who  had  been  talking 
a  great  deal  about  realism  and  the  realists  in  art. 
The  lady  did  not  seem  to  be  ready  with  an  answer, 
since  she  could  only  reply  that  “  A  realist  is  he  who 
represents  subjects  in  a  realistic  manner.” 

I  hold,  though,  that  the  art  of  representing  subjects 
in  a  realistic  manner  does  not  entitle  a  person  to 
the  name  of  realist.  And,  in  order  to  illustrate  my 
meaning,  I  may  present  the  following  example  : 

When  the  war  of  the  British  with  the  Zulus  came 
to  an  end,  there  could  be  found  no  man  among  the 
prominent  English  artists  who  would  take  upon  him¬ 
self  the  task  of  committing  to  canvas  that  epopee 
enacted  between  the  whites  and  blacks,  and  so  the 
English  had  to  have  recourse  to  a  very  talented 


4 


Realism . 


French  artist.  They  gave  him  money,  and  explained 
to  him  that  such  and  such  were  the  uniforms  and  the 
arms  of  the  English  soldiers,  and  such  and  such  were 
the  clothing,  or  what  represents  clothing,  among  the 
Zulus.  Then,  eye-witnesses  to  the  military  encoun¬ 
ters  told  the  Frenchman  of  what  consisted  the  back¬ 
ground  to  the  affair  in  each  case,  most  likely  sup¬ 
plementing  their  accounts  with  photographic  views. 
Armed  with  this  information  the  artist  set  to  work, 
without  having  the  least  personal  knowledge  of  the 
country  he  was  going  to  reproduce,  nor  of  the  types, 
the  peculiarities,  or  the  customs  of  Zululand.  With 
much  assurance  the  artist  went  on  with  his  task  and 
turned  out  several  lively  pictures  in  which  there  are 
a  great  many  men  attacking  an  enemy — defending 
itself;  a  great  number  of  dead  and  wounded; 
much  blood  ;  much  gunpowder-smoke,  and  all  that 
kind  of  thing,  yet,  with  all  this,  there  is  total  lack  of 
the  principal  thing  :  there  are  no  Britishers  nor  Zulus 
to  be  found  in  the  pictures.  Instead  of  the  former  we 
behold  Frenchmen  dressed  up  in  British  uniforms, 
and  instead  of  Zulus,  the  ordinary  Parisian  negro- 
models,  reproduced  in  various  more  or  less  warlike 
attitudes. 

Well,  is  that  realism?  No. 

Most  artists,  besides,  do  not  take  sufficient  pains 
to  reproduce  the  true  light  under  which  the  events 
they  treat  have  really  taken  place.  Thus,  such 
scenes  as  are  taken  up  in  the  just  mentioned  pict¬ 
ures — scenes  of  battles  under  the  intolerably  torrid 


Realism. 


5 


sun  of  Africa,  are  being  painted  by  the  grayish  light 
of  European  studios.  Of  course  the  sunlight,  and  the 
numerous  peculiar  effects  dependent  on  it,  cannot 
prove  successful  in  such  a  case  and  the  effect  is 
lost. 

Is  that  realism  then  ?  Certainly  not. 

******* 

I  go  further,  and  assert  that  in  cases  where  there 
exists  but  a  bare  representation  of  a  fact  or  of  an 
event  without  idea,  without  generalization,  there 
can  possibly  be  found  some  qualities  of  realistic  ex¬ 
ecution,  but  of  realism  there  would  be  none:  of  that 
intelligent  realism,  I  mean,  which  is  built  on  ob¬ 
servation  and  on  facts — in  opposition  to  idealism, 
which  is  founded  on  impressions  and  affirmations, 
established  a  priori. 

Now,  can  any  one  bring  the  reproach  against  me 
that  there  is  no  idea,  no  generalization  in  my  works  ? 
Hardly. 

Can  anyone  say  that  I  am  careless  about  the  types, 
about  the  costumes,  about  the  landscape  of  the 
scenes  represented  by  me?  That  I  don’t  study  out 
beforehand  the  personages,  the  surroundings  figur¬ 
ing  in  my  works  ?  Hardly  so. 

Can  anyone  say  that,  with  me,  any  scene,  taking 
place  in  reality  in  the  broad  sunlight,  had  been 
painted  by  studio  light — that  a  scene,  taking  place 
under  the  frosty  skies  of  the  North,  is  reproduced  in 
the  warm  inclosure  of  four  walls?  Hardly  so. 

Consequently,  I  can  claim  to  be  a  representative 


6 


Realism . 


of  realism,  such  realism  as  requires  the  most  severe 
manipulating  of  all  the  details  of  creation,  and  which 
not  only  does  not  exclude  an  idea,  but  implies  it. 

That  I  am  not  alone  in  such  an  estimate  of  my 
work,  is  proved  by  the  following  lines,  from  a  corre- 
pondent  to  an  American  paper,*  sent  from  Paris  at 
the  time  of  the  last  exposition  of  my  paintings  in 
that  city : 

“  The  respect  shown  to  certain  pictured  ideals — 
the  ideals  of  a  painter  so  foreign  to  Parisian  conven¬ 
tions  as  Verestchagin — is  noted  «s  a  pleasing  indica¬ 
tion  of  departure  from  the  gross  realism  that  was 
beginningto  obtain  in  French  art.  Mr.  Dargenty,  of 
‘  Courrier  de  l’Art,’  does  not  consider  Verestchagin 
as  a  ‘  seducing  ’  painter,  but  concedes  to  him  knowl¬ 
edge  and  talent,  and  declares  that  for  his  part  he 
prefers  the  refinement  of  an  idea  to  the  ‘brutal  ex¬ 
pression  of  vulgar  realism.’  He  hopes  for  a  reaction 
and  believes  that  the  crowd  that  ‘  precipitated  ’  itself 
in  the  exposition  of  Mr.  Verestchagin  ‘  heralded  ’  a 
running  victory  for  the  idea.” 

Still  more  notable  was  the  judgment  of  the  Lon¬ 
don  “Christian  ”  of  December  2d,  1887 — a  view  hav¬ 
ing  all  the  more  interest  to  me  because  of  the  special 
character  of  the  paper  that  published  it : 

“  These  paintings  are  the  work  of  a  Russian, 
Verestchagin,  a  painter  equal  to  any  of  his  contem¬ 
poraries  in  artistic  ability,  and  beyond  any  painter 


*  Sunday  Express,  Albany,  22  July,  1888. 


Realism. 


7 


who  ever  lived  in  the  grandeur  of  his  moral  aims 
and  the  application  of  his  lessons  to  the  consciences 
of  all  who  take  the  least  pains  to  understand  him. 
******* 

I  will  only  say  that  he  who  misses  seeing  these 
paintings  will  miss  the  best  opportunity  he  may 
ever  have  of  understanding  the  age  in  which  he  lives; 
for  if  ever  the  nineteenth  century  has  had  a  prophet, 
it  is  the  Russian  painter,  Verestchagin.” 

I  repeat  it :  I  cite  this  last  passage  expressedly  in 
consideration  of  its  character,  as  an  opinion 
emitted  by  a  specially  religious  organ,  an  opinion 
made  all  the  more  significant  in  view  of  the  attacks 
to  which  I  had  been  submitted  by  people  striving 
to  prove  themselves  greater  papists  than  the  Pope. 
******* 

Realism  is  not  antagonistic  to  anything  that  is 
held  dear  by  the  contemporary  man — it  does  not 
clash  with  common  sense,  with  science,  nor  with 
religion.  Can  anyone  have  anything  but  the  deepest 
reverence  for  the  teachings  of  Christ  concerning  the 
Father  and  Creator  of  all  that  exists — to  the  golden 
rule  of  Christian  charity  ? 

It  is  true  that  we  are  enemies  of  bigotry,  of  all 
ostentatious,  assumed  piety  ;  but  who  is  it  that  can 
blame  us  for  this  since  Christ  himself  has  said : 

“  But  when  ye  pray,  use  not  vain  repetitions  as 
the  heathen  do ;  for  they  think  they  shall  be  heard 
for  their  much  speaking.”  * 


*  St.  Matthew,  VI.  :  7. 


8 


Realism . 


As  can  be  easily  conceived,  we  have  a  different 
estimation  of  many  things  that  were  being  explained 
in  another  way  some  hundreds  of  years  ago.  The 
infancy  of  science  and,  consequently,  of  the  entire 
conception  of  the  universe  can  interest  us  now,  but 
it  can  no  more  direct  us ;  at  the  threshold  of  the 
twentieth  century,  we  can  no  longer  admit  that  the 
skies  above  are  peopled  by  saints  and  by  angels  ; 
that  the  interior  of  the  earth  is  occupied  by  devils 
engaged  in  their  task  of  roasting  the  sinners  of  the 
world.  We  refuse  even  to  accept,  in  its  literal  sense, 
the  ancient  idea  of  rewards  for  good  deeds  and  that 
of  torments  in  slow  fires,  as  punishment  for  evil 
deeds. 

In  our  capacity  of  artists  we  don’t  deny  the  ideals 
of  the  past  ages  and  of  the  ancient  masters.  On  the 
contrary,  we  give  them  an  honorable  place  in  the 
history  of  art ;  but  we  refuse  to  imitate  them  for  the 
very  simple  reason  that  everything  is  good  in  its 
own  time,  and  that  the  realism  of  one  century 
already  bears  in  itself  the  germs  of  the  idealism  of 
the  next. 

The  very  same  masters  who  are  held  to  be  great 
idealists  in  art — have  not  they  been  great  realists  in 
their  own  time  ? 

Who  would  risk  the  assertion  that  Raphael  was 
not  a  realist  in  the  age  in  which  he  lived  ;  that  his 
works  did  not  scandalize  many  of  his  contem¬ 
poraries,  whose  tastes  were  formed  on  the  forms  of 
primitive  masters? 


Realism . 


9 


And  Rubens,  who  transgressed  all  limits  of  con¬ 
temporary  decency,  and  that,  not  only  in  his  capac¬ 
ity  of  painter,  but  even  as  a  thinker  ?  I  hope  no 
one  would  be  ready  to  question  the  fact  that  his 
powerful  but  one-sided  genius  has  intermingled  the 
types  of  the  personalities  of  the  Christian  religion 
with  those  of  the  heathenish  mythology ;  that  his 
God  the  Father  is  the  same  as  his  Jupiter  of 
Olympus  ;  that  they  are  portraits  of  the  very  same 
red-cheeked  studio  model ;  that  his  Virgin  and  his 
Hebe — one  may  even  say  his  Venus — are  all  person¬ 
alities  of  the  same  type,  all  alike  red-cheeked,  hand¬ 
some  and  self-satisfied  !  Who  would  deny  that 
Rubens,  having  peopled  the  Christian  heavens  with 
heavy,  buxom,  healthy  and  very  immodest  ladies 
and  gentlemen,  had  reversed  all  traditions  and  thus 
had  shown  himself  to  be  a  talented,  powerful  realist 
in  his  time?  Doubtlessly,  he  bewildered  and  scan¬ 
dalized  a  good  many  of  his  pious  contemporaries. 

And  Rembrandt !  and  the  rest  of  them,  all  of 
whom  are  now  held  to  be  idealists,  more  or  less  so  : 
was  not  each  one  of  them  a  representative  of  realism 
in  his  time,  realism  that  has  been  considerably 
smoothed  down  in  our  days  by  the  hand  of  time  on 
one  side  and  the  onward  march  of  our  self-conscious¬ 
ness  on  the  other  ? 

Who  would  think  nowadays  of  reproaching  those 
painters  for  all  that  boldness,  which  certainly  had 
proved  astounding  to  their  contemporaries?  And 
yet  how  many  were  the  disputes  concerning  those 


IO 


Realism . 


painters,  how  many  lances  have  been  broken  in 
their  behalf !  As  we  look  back  now  all  that  seems 
strange  to  us.  But  is  not  all  that  a  sign  of  what 
awaits  the  noted  works  of  our  own  time?  These 
also  were  received  inimically,  were  proclaimed  to  be 
too  far-reaching,  too  bold,  too  realistic,  yet  will 
not  they  also  in  their  turn  acquire  lasting  strength 
under  the  influence  of  onward  marching  thought 
and  technics?  Will  not  the  day  come  when  they 
will  also  find  themselves,  unawares,  in  the  archives 
of  old  ideals? 

******* 

But  we  have  to  count  with  our  irascible  and 
exacting  contemporaries.  It  is  generally  held  to  be 
unpardonable  boldness — quite  a  scandalous  pro¬ 
ceeding  in  fact  —  to  recede  from  formulas,  recog¬ 
nized  by  successive  generations,  through  centuries. 
Novelists,  painters,  sculptors,  musicians,  are  all  alike 
invited  to  make  compromises  with  triviality  and 
absurdity  which  invariably  retard  the  development 
of  the  idea  and  of  the  technics. 

Even  such  persons  as  grudgingly  admit  that  we 
also  are  “  men  of  thoughts,”  that  we  also  are  “  men 
of  well  developed  technics,”  even  they  express 
their  regrets  that  we  should  prove  false  to  the  tradi¬ 
tions  of  the  old  masters ;  that  we  should  not  follow 
the  tenets  consecrated  by  great  names. 

Yes,  it  is  true :  we  differ  in  many  ways ;  we  think 
differently,  we  are  bolder  in  our  generalization  of  the 
facts  of  the  past,  the  present  and  the  future;  we 


Realism . 


II 

even  work  differently  and  transfer  our  impressions  in 
a  different  manner. 

Can  we  take  it  now  in  its  literal  sense — the  gener¬ 
ally  accepted  conception  of  God,  who  had  once 
assumed  the  form  of  Man,  and  is  now  sitting  on  the 
right  hand  of  the  Father  Almighty,  with  all  the 
hosts  of  saints  and  angels  gathered  around  Him  ? 
Can  we  admit  as  facts  the  idea  of  all  those  thrones 
that  surpass  in  richness  the  celebrated  thrones  of  the 
Great  Moguls  of  India  ?  Can  we  admit  now  the 
idea  of  all  those  splendid  vestments,  adorned  with 
embroidery,  with  pearls  and  precious  stones  and  all 
that  in  the  clouds  ?  Can  we  sincerely  and  artlessly 
represent  to  ourselves  the  saints  that  are  supposed 
to  sit  on  those  same  clouds  as  on  arm-chairs  and 
sofas,  likewise  in  the  richest  attire  —  saints  who 
would  be  found  thus  amidst  the  luxurious  sur¬ 
roundings  that  were  so  distasteful  to  them  in  their 
life  on  earth. 

All  those  splendid  garments,  all  those  gilded  sur¬ 
roundings,  held  out  as  everlasting  rewards  for  virtue 
practiced  on  earth — don’t  they  appear  to  us  quite 
childish  now,  not  to  say  wholly  inconsistent  with 
good  taste  ? 

******* 

A  good  deal  has  been  written  about  my  works : 
many  were  the  reproaches  brought  against  my  paint¬ 
ings,  those  treating  of  religious  subjects  as  well 
as  of  military.  And  yet  they  were,  all  of  them, 
painted  without  any  preconceived  idea, — were 


12 


Realism. 


painted  only  because  their  subjects  interested  me. 
The  moral  in  each  case  appeared  afterwards,  com¬ 
ing  up  of  its  own  account,  from  the  very  truthful¬ 
ness  of  impressions. 

Now,  for  instance,  I  have  seen  Emperor  Alexan¬ 
der  II.  on  five  consecutive  days,  as  he  sat  on  a  little 
knoll — the  battle-field  spreading  out  be-fore  him — 
watching,  with  field-glass  in  hand,  first  the  bom¬ 
bardment,  and  then  the  storming  of  the  enemy’s 
positions.  This,  surely,  was  also  the  way  in  which 
the  old  German  Emperor  attended  battles, —  as  well 
as  his  son,  that  admirable  man,  the  late  Frederick 
of  Germany.  Of  this  I  have  even  been  assured  by 
eye-witnesses.  Certainly,  it  would  be  ridiculous  to 
suppose  that  an  Emperor  assisting  at  battles  would 
canter  about  brandishing  his  sword  as  a  young  en¬ 
sign,  and  yet  the  desire  has  been  attributed  to  me 
to  undermine  by  my  picture  the  prestige  of  the  sov¬ 
ereign  in  the  eyes  of  the  masses,  who  are  prone  to 
imagine  their  Emperor  prancing  on  a  fiery  steed,  in 
times  of  danger,  in  the  very  thick  of  the  fight. 

I  have  represented  the  bandagingand  the  transport¬ 
ing  of  the  wounded  exactly  as  I  have  seen  it  done  and 
have  felt  it  in  my  own  person  when  wounded,  ban¬ 
daged  and  transported  in  the  most  primitive  man¬ 
ner.  And  yet,  that  again  has  been  declared  to  be  a 
gross  exaggeration,  a  calumny. 

I  observed  during  several  days  how  prisoners 
were  slowly  freezing  to  death  on  a  road  extending 
over  thirty  miles.  I  called  the  attention  of  the 


Realism. 


13 


American  artist,  Frank  D.  Millet,  who  was  on  the 
spot,  to  that  scene ;  and  when  he  afterwards  saw  my 
painting  he  declared  it  to  be  strikingly  correct;  yet 
for  that  painting  I  have  been  treated  to  such  abuse 
as  would  not  admit  of  repetition  in  print. 

I  have  seen  a  priest  performing  the  last  religious 
rites  on  a  battle-field  over  a  mass  of  killed,  plundered, 
mutilated  soldiers,  who  had  just  given  up  their  life 
in  the  defense  of  their  country ;  and  that  scene 
again — a  picture  which  I  had  painted,  literally,  with 
tears  in  my  eyes — has  been  also  proclaimed  in  high 
quarters  to  be  the  product  of  my  imagination,  a 
downright  falsehood. 

My  lofty  accusers  did  not  deign  to  pay  any  atten¬ 
tion  to  the  fact  that  the  lie  was  given  them  by  that 
same  priest  who,  disgusted  with  the  accusations 
against  me,  declared — and  that  in  the  presence  of 
the  public  standing  before  the  picture — that  it  was 
he  who  had  been  performing  those  last  rites  over 
the  massed  bodies  of  the  killed  soldiers — had  done 
it  in  the  very  surroundings  reproduced  in  my  pict¬ 
ure.  Yet,  notwithstanding  all  this,  my  picture  bare¬ 
ly  escaped  being  ejected  from  the  exposition,  and 
when  afterwards  it  was  intended  to  publish  all  those 
pictures  in  colored  prints,  the  officials  put  their  veto 
on  the  scheme,  for  fear  that  those  cheap  prints  should 
find  their  way  among  the  masses. 

It  should  not  be  imagined,  however,  that  that  in¬ 
dignation  prevailed  exclusively  in  Russian  high 
spheres.  It  was  a  very  well  known  Prussian  gen- 


14 


Realism, , 


eral  who  advised  Emperor  Alexander  II.  to  have  all 
my  military  paintings  burned,  as  objects  of  a  most 
pernicious  kind. 

******* 

There  were  still  more  inimical  commentaries  on 
those  of  my  pictures  which  treat  of  religious  sub¬ 
jects.  Yet  have  I  attacked  the  Christian  morals? 
No — I  hold  these  very  highly.  Have  I  attacked  the 
idea  of  Christianity  or  its  founder  ?  No — I  have  the 
highest  respect  for  them.  Have  I  tried  to  detract 
from  the  significance  of  the  Cross  ?  No — this  would 
be  a  sheer  impossibility. 

I  have  traveled  all  over  the  Holy  Land  with  the 
book  of  the  Gospels  in  my  hand  ;  I  have  visited  all 
the  places  sanctified,  centuries  ago,  by  the  presence 
of  our  Saviour  in  them.  Consequently,  I  must  have, 
and  do  have,  my  own  ideas  and  conceptions  as  to 
the  representation  of  many  events  and  facts  record¬ 
ed  in  the  Gospels.  My  ideas  necessarily  differ  from 
the  conceptions  of  artists  who  have  never  seen 
the  scenery  of  the  Holy  Land,  have  not  personally 
observed  its  population  and  their  customs. 

******* 

Here  is  my  idea,  for  instance,  of  the  fact  of  the 
adoration  of  the  Magi ;  a  painting  contemplated,  but 
not  yet  executed. 

A  clear,  starry  night ;  travelers  are  approaching 
Bethlehem  —  those  are  the  Magi,  men  versed  in 
science,  having  a  knowledge  of  astrology.  Proceed¬ 
ing  on  their  way  toward  the  city,  the  wise  men 


Realism. 


15 


notice  a  star  standing  over  it — a  star  which  they 
never  yet  had  observed.  Since,  at  that  time,  the 
idea  was  prevalent  that  every  man  had  his  own  star; 
and,  vice  versa ,  every  star  corresponded  to  some 
man  on  earth,  so  the  Magi  naturally  conclude  that 
this  new  star  indicates  the  birth  of  a  child  some¬ 
where  in  the  neighborhood,  and  that — the  star  being 
exceptionally  brilliant  —  the  new-born  child  must 
develop  into  a  most  prominent  man. 

Arriving  at  Bethlehem,  the  Magi  put  up  at  an  inn. 
Soon  after,  the  servant,  who  had  been  attending  to 
the  travelers’  mules,  comes  in  and  tells  the  Magi 
that  a  poor  woman  had  sought  refuge  in  the  place 
where  their  animals  were  kept,  and  there  had  given 
birth  to  a  most  beautiful  child.  Hearing  this,  the 
Magi  exchange  significant  glances — the  coming  up 
of  the  star  has  been  rightly  interpreted  by  them. 

“  Let  us  go  and  see  ;  it  must  be  an  extraordinary 
child,”  they  say,  and  thereupon  proceed  to  the 
grotto  of  the  inn,  where  the  horses,  the  cows  and 
the  donkeys  were  kept,  being  followed  by  a  few 
other  travelers,  who  are  likewise  curious  to  see  the 
new-born  child. 

In  a  corner  of  the  grotto  they  observe  a  beautiful, 
pale  young  woman,  sitting  on  a  pile  of  straw  and 
nursing  her  baby,  whilst  her  husband,  an  elderly 
man,  is  seen  in  the  distance,  outside  the  grotto,  pre¬ 
paring  something  for  his  family. 

“  What  a  beautiful  child  !  ”  exclaimed  the  Magi, 
and  turning  to  the  Virgin,  say:  “  Remember  our 


i6 


Realism . 


words,  He  will  be  a  great  man;  we  have  seen  His 
star.” 

Then,  their  pity  being  stirred  by  the  poverty  of 
the  surroundings,  one  of  the  wise  men  would  offer  a 
gold  coin  as  a  gift  to  the  child,  while  another  would, 
perhaps,  pour  out  a  little  of  the  precious  myrrh  from 
his  traveling-flask.  As  the  wise  men  get  ready  to 
leave  the  grotto,  they  turn  once  more  to  Mary  and 
repeat  their  prediction  concerning  the  great  future 
of  the  child,  and  “  Mary  kept  these  things  and  pon¬ 
dered  them  in  her  heart.” 

I  firmly  believe  that  such  a  realistic  representation 
of  the  poverty  and  simplicity  attending  the  nativity 
of  Christ  is  incomparably  loftier  than  the  idealiza¬ 
tion  of  richness  and  other  exaggerations  to  which 
old  masters  had  recourse.  But  such  a  treatment  of 
the  subject  is  new  ;  therefore  it  appears  strange,  and 
very  likely  will  excite  comment.  And  only  in  a 
century  or  two  our  descendants  will  be  able  to 
decide  which  of  these  two  opposing  views  was  the 
correct  one. 

******* 

Among  the  paintings  on  exhibition  will  be  noticed 
one  portraying  a  not  infrequent  event  in  Palestine 
in  the  olden  time — an  event  highly  dramatic  yet 
retaining  all  its  simplicity.  I  mean  “  A  crucifixior 
under  the  Romans.” 

The  sky  is  overcast  by  heavy  black  clouds.  Just 
outside  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  on  a  small  rock,  are 
erected  three  crosses,  all  of  the  same  size,  shape 


Realism . 


1 7 

and  appearance.  The  figures  of  the  crucified  on  the 
two  sides  are  of  a  vulgar  type  and  of  coarse  build, 
while  the  central  figure  is  of  a  more  refined  form. 
His  face  is  not  seen;  it  is  hid  by  long  auburn 
hair  that  hangs  over  it ;  long  hair  indicates  that 
the  crucified  was  a  man  who  dedicated  himself  to 
God.  The  wounds  on  the  hands  and  feet  of  the 
three  crucified  men  bleed  profusely  (it  being  a  well- 
known  fact  that  physicians  find  it  difficult  to  stop 
the  flow  of  blood  out  of  outstretched  palms  and 
feet).  In  front  of  the  crosses  stand  two  priests  of 
high  rank,  and  they  seemingly  argue  about  some 
matter,  as  if  trying  to  prove  something  to  a  Roman 
in  military  attire :  possibly  they  refer  to  the  guilt  of 
the  man  crucified  on  the  middle  cross,  a  guilt  about 
which  the  military  man  seemed  to  retain  some 
doubts.  Around  the  rock  soldiers  are  forming  a 
chain  to  restrain  the  crowd. 

In  the  foreground  of  the  painting  are  seen  people 
of  every  description  ;  some  on  foot,  some  on  horse¬ 
back  ;  others  mounted  on  camels  or  on  donkeys. 
Those  are  country  folks  or  nomads,  who,  returning 
home  from  market,  stopped  over  on  their  way  for  a 
moment  in  order  to  witness  the  event  of  the  day — 
the  execution  of  a  man,  the  renown  of  whose  deeds 
had  reached  even  their  huts  and  tents — a  man  whose 
arrest  caused  almost  an  insurrection  in  the  city. 
Among  others  in  the  crowd  can  be  noticed  a  few 
Hebrew  merchants  with  their  characteristic  head- 
gear  (which  was  discarded  at  a  comparatively  late 


2 


i8 


Realism . 


date),  and  Pharisees  with  the  letters  of  the  Law 
written  on  the  coverings  of  their  heads.  One  of  the 
Pharisees  is  discussing  something  with  his  neighbor 
concerning  a  woman  who  is  seen  weeping  bitterly, 
in  the  corner  of  the  picture,  presumably  the  mother 
of  one  of  the  crucified  men.  Her  face  cannot  be 
seen,  but  her  sorrow  must  be  great  indeed,  and  none 
of  the  women  surrounding  her  seem  likely  to  be  able 
to  console  her.  Many  a  time,  probably,  had  she 
tried  to  avert  her  son  from  his  chosen  course,  but  all 
in  vain,  and  now  his  time  has  come. 

By  the  side  of  the  heart-broken  mother  stands  a 
handsome  young  woman  plunged  into  deep  conster¬ 
nation  at  the  sight  of  the  executed  man  ;  the  tears 
run  down  her  cheek,  but  she  is  not  conscious  of  it,  so 
thoroughly  absorbed  is  she  by  her  terrible,  unspeak¬ 
able  grief. 

As  soon  as  the  authorities  would  retire  and  the 
crowd  thin  out,  there  would  be  a  chance  for  the 
mother,  and  those  that  surround  her,  to  approach 
the  crosses  ;  then  they  would  find  it  possible  to  say 
their  last  farewell.  . 

******* 

Further  on,  we  have  a  representation  of  a  contem¬ 
porary  execution,  among  other  people  and  surround¬ 
ings.  Here  we  see  a  cold  winter  day  in  the  North. 
A  mass  of  people  is  crowding  on  one  of  the  squares 
of  St.  Petersburg,  pressing  toward  the  gallows  and 
being  held  back  by  mounted  gendarmes.  Close  to 
the  gallows  are  admitted  but  the  chosen  ones, 


Realism . 


19 


mostly  the  military,  all  representatives  of  the  gilded 
youth  of  the  city,  who  are  in  hopes  of  getting  a 
piece  of  the  cord  used  by  the  hangman  :  the  super¬ 
stition  being  very  common  that  a  piece  of  the  cord 
on  which  a  man  was  hung  is  sure  to  bring  luck  at 
cards  to  its  fortunate  possessor. 

The  criminal,  enveloped  in  a  white  shroud  with 
the  cap  drawn  over  his  head,  has  just  been  hung  and 
is  yet  whirling  round  on  the  cord,  while  the  people 
stand  in  mute  bewilderment  before  the  instructive 
sight.  There  is  but  a  single  hoarse  voice  elevated 
from  among  the  crowd  :  “  There  now — serves  them 
right,  too  !  ”  But  these  words  are  immediately 
hushed  by  several  women’s  voices  crying  out, 
“  What  are  you  saying?  It  is  beyond  us  to  condemn 
him  now.  Let  God  Almighty  pass  judgment  on 
him  !  ” 

Meantime  the  snow  continues  to  fall,  the  smoke 
is  rising  from  the  factories,  the  work  is  going  on  as 
usual . 

******* 

It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  this  last  painting, 
while  it  did  not  please  Russians,  pleased  the  English 
people  very  much  indeed ;  on  the  other  side,  the 
“  Blowing  from  guns  in  India  ”  is  not  at  all  liked  by 
Englishmen,  and  yet  the  Russians  fancied  it  very 
much.  Men  who  had  seen  much  service  in  India 
assured  me  that  I  was  mistaken  in  presenting  such 
an  execution  as  a  typical,  characteristic  way  of 
capital  punishment  in  that  country ;  they  insisted 


20 


Realism . 


that  this  mode  of  execution  had  been  adopted  but 
once — in  the  course  of  the  last  insurrection  of  the 
Sepoys — and  even  at  that  time  it  had  been  used  but 
in  a  very  few  instances.  But  I  maintain  that  this 
mode  of  execution — a  comparatively  humane  one 
too — not  only  has  been  in  constant  use  during  the 
revolt  referred  to,  when  the  Sepoys  were  blown 
from  guns  by  the  thousand,  but  that  it  was  used  by 
the  British  authorities  in  India  for  many  years 
before  and  after  the  Sepoy  revolt  of  1858.  More 
than  that,  I  am  quite  positive  that  that  particular 
mode  of  execution  will  have  to  be  used  in  future 
times.  The  Hindoo  does  not  fear  any  other  kind  of 
capital  punishment  received  at  the  hands  of  the 
“  heathenish,  unclean  Europeans.”  They  hold  that 
any  one  shot  down  or  hung  by  the  European  goes 
to  swell  the  ranks  of  the  martyrs  who  are  entitled 
to  a  high  reward  in  the  future  life.  But  an  execu¬ 
tion  by  means  of  a  gun  carries  positive  terror  into 
the  heart  of  a  native,  since  such  a  shot  tears  the 
criminal’s  body  in  many  parts  and  thus  prevents 
him  from  presenting  himself  in  decent  form  in 
heaven.  This  bugbear'  was  used  by  the  British, 
and  will  be  used  by  them  as  long  as  they  fear 
to  lose  their  Indian  possessions. 

In  order  to  hold  a  population  of  250,000,000  in 
political  and  economical  submission  by  means  of 
60,000  bayonets,  it  is  not  enough  to  be  brave  and  to 
be  possessed  of  political  tact — punishment  and  bloody 

reprisals  cannot  be  avoided. 

******* 


Realism . 


21 

All  this  is  so  self-evident,  that  it  seems  really  won¬ 
derful  that,  while  we  artists  are  required  to  observe 
and  discriminate,  people  are  still  inclined  to  be 
astonished  and  indignant  whenever  we  put  those 
faculties  of  ours  to  use  and  transfer  our  impressions 
to  canvas  or  paper. 

The  artists  are  on  ali  hands  pressed  to  give  the 
public  something  new,  something  original,  something 
that  is  not  hackneyed  by  fashion  and  triviality ;  yet, 
when  we  make  an  effort  to  present  something  of  the 
sort,  we  are  accused  of  insolence. 

And  what  are  the  results  of  such  a  state  of 
things  ? 

People  get  tired  of  books  and  gorge  themselves 
on  crude  facts  from  real  life  as  recorded  in  daily 
newspapers ;  people  get  tired  of  picture  galleries  and 
expositions,  being  certain  to  find  in  most  of  them  the 
very  same  kind  of  pictures — all  treating  of  the  very 
same  subjects,  painted  in  an  identical  manner;  peo¬ 
ple  find  it  a  dull  task  to  go  to  the  theaters  where  in 
nine  plays  out  of  ten  they  will  find  the  very  same 
conventional  plot,  invariably  terminating  in  a  wed- 
ding. 

Well,  what  is  now  the  part  of  art  generally  speak- 
ing? 

Why,  art  is  brought  down  to  the  level  of  a  toy 
for  such  as  can  and  like  to  be  amused  by  it ;  it  is 
expected,  as  it  were,  to  stimulate  the  public’s  digest¬ 
ive  powers.  Paintings,  for  instance,  are  considered 
simply  as  furniture :  if  there  happens  to  remain  an 


22 


Realism. 


empty  space  on  the  wall  between  the  door  and  the 
corner  taken  up,  let  us  say,  by  a  What-Not  surmount¬ 
ed  by  a  vase — why  then,  that  empty  space  is  forth¬ 
with  covered  by  a  picture  of  light  contents  and  of 
pleasant  execution  ;  such  a  one  as  would  not  de¬ 
tract  too  much  attention  from  the  other  furniture 
and  bric-a-brac,  would  not  interfere  with  the  dolce 
far  niente  of  visitors. 

And  yet  the  influence  and  the  resources  of  art  are 
enormous.  The  majority  of  old-time  painters  were 
handicapped  by  their  allegiance  to  power  and  riches  ; 
they  were  men  who  were  not  weighed  down  by  any 
sense  of  serious  civil  responsibility,  and  yet,  notwith¬ 
standing  this,  how  powerful  was  the  influence  of  art 
during  whole  centuries.  It  was  felt  in  all  the  corners 
and  hidden  recesses  of  the  life  of  the  nations! 

What  then  is  not  to  be  expected  from  art  in  our 
time,  when  artists  are  inspired  with  their  duties 
as  citizens  of  their  country — when  they  cease  to 
dance  attendance  on  the  rich  and  powerful,  who 
love  to  be  called  patrons  of  art — when  artists 
have  acquired  independence  and  have  begun  to 
realize  that  the  first  condition  of  a  fruitful  activity 
is  to  be  a  gentleman,  not  in  its  narrow  meaning 
of  caste,  but  in  the  wide  acceptance  of  the  term 
pertaining  to  the  time  we  live  in. 

******* 

Armed  with  the  confidence  of  the  public,  art  will 
adhere  more  closely  to  society,  will  constitute  itself 
its  ally  in  the  face  of  the  serious  danger  that  threat- 


Realism. 


23 


ens  society  nowadays — that  kind  of  society  which 
we  all  know,  which  we  are  all  more  or  less  prompted 
to  love  and  to  respect. 

There  is  no  gamsaying  the  fact  that  all  the  other 
questions  of  our  time  are  paling  before  the  question 
of  socialism  that  advances  on  us,  threateningly,  like  a 
tremendous  thunder  cloud. 

The  masses  that  have  been  for  centuries  leading  a 
life  of  expectancy  while  hanging  on  the  very  borders 
of  starvation,  are  willing  to  wait  no  more.  Their 
former  hopes  in  the  future  are  discarded  ;  their  ap¬ 
petites  are  whetted  and  they  are  clamoring  for  ar¬ 
rears,  which  means  now  the  division  of  all  the  riches, 
and  so  as  to  make  the  division  more  lasting,  they  are 
claiming  that  talents  and  capacities  should  be  level¬ 
ed  down  to  one  standard,  all  workers  of  progress 
and  comfort  alike  drawing  the  same  pay.  They  are 
striving  to  reconstruct  society  on  new  foundations, 
and  in  case  of  opposition  to  their  aims,  they  threaten 
to  apply  the  torch  to  all  the  monuments  pertaining 
to  an  order  that,  according  to  them,  has  already 
outlived  its  usefulness ;  they  threaten  to  blow  up 
the  public  buildings,  the  churches,  the  art  galleries, 
libraries  and  museums — a  downright  religion  of 
despair ! 

******* 


II. 

My  friend,  the  late  General  Skobeleff,  once  asked 
me,  “  How  do  you  understand  the  movement  of  the 


24 


Realism . 


socialists  and  the  anarchists.”  He  owned  to  it  that 
he,  himself,  did  not  understand  at  all  what  they 
aimed  at.  “  What  do  they  want  ?  What  are  they 
striving  to  attain  ?  ” 

“  First  of  all,”  I  answered,  “  those  people  object 
to  wars  between  nations  ;  again,  their  appreciation 
of  art  is  very  limited,  the  art  of  painting  not  ex¬ 
cluded.  Thus,  if  they  ever  come  into  power,  you, 
with  your  strategic  combinations,  and  I,  with  my 
pictures,  will  both  be  shelved  immediately.  Do  you 
understand  this  ?  ” 

“  Yes,  I  understand  this,”  rejoined  Skobeleff,  “  and 
from  this  on  I  am  determined  to  fight  them.” 

There  is  no  mistaking  the  fact  that,  as  I  have 
said  before,  society  is  seriously  threatened  at  the 
hands  of  a  large  mass  of  people  counting  hundreds 
of  millions.  Those  are  the  people,  who,  for 
generations,  during  entire  centuries,  have  been  on 
the  brink  of  starvation,  poorly  clad,  living  in 
filthy  and  unhealthy  quarters ;  paupers,  and  such 
people  as  have  scarcely  any  property,  or  no  pro¬ 
perty  at  all.  Well,  who  is  it  that  is  to  blame  for 
their  poverty — are  not  they  themselves  to  be  blamed 
for  it  ? 

No,  it  would  be  unjust  to  lay  all  the  blame  at 
their  door;  it  is  more  likely  that  society  at  large  is 
more  to  blame  for  their  condition  than  they  are 
themselves. 

Is  there  any  way  out  of  the  situation  ? 

Certainly  there  is.  Christ,  our  Great  Teacher, 


Realism . 


25 


has  long  ago  pointed  out  the  way  in  which  the  rich 
and  the  powerful  could  remedy  the  situation  without 
bringing  things  to  a  revolutionary  pass,  without  any 
upheaval  of  the  existing  social  order,  if  they  would 
only  seriously  take  care  of  the  miserable  ;  that  cer¬ 
tainly  would  have  insured  them  the  undisturbed 
enjoyment  of  the  bulk  of  their  fortune.  But  there 
is  little  hope  of  a  peaceful  solution  of  the  question 
now;  it  is  certain  that  the  well-to-do  classes  will 
still  prefer  to  remain  Christians  in  name  only ;  they 
will  still  hope  that  palliative  measures  will  be  suffi¬ 
cient  to  remedy  the  situation  ;  or  else,  believing  the 
danger  to  be  distant  yet,  they  will  not  be  disposed 
to  give  up  much  ;  while  the  paupers — though  for¬ 
merly  they  were  ready  for  a  compromise — may  be 
soon  found  unwilling  to  take  the  pittance  offered 
them. 

What  do  they  want,  then  ? 

Nothing  less  than  the  equalization  of  riches  in 
the  society  to  come ;  they  claim  the  material  as 
well  as  moral  equalization  of  all  rights,  trades,  all 
capacities  and  talents;  as  we  have  already  said,  they 
strive  to  undermine  all  the  foundations  of  the  exist¬ 
ing  state  of  society,  and,  in  inaugurating  a  new 
order  of  things  they  claim  to  be  able  to  open  a  real 
era  of  liberty,  equality  and  fraternity,  instead  of  the 
shadows  of  those  lofty  things,  as  existing  now. 
******* 

I  do  not  mean  to  go  into  the  discussion  of  the 
matter ;  I  would  not  pretend  to  point  out  how  much 


26 


Realism. 


justice  or  injustice,  how  much  soundness  or  unsound¬ 
ness  there  is  in  these  claims ;  I  state  only  the  fact 
that  there  is  a  deep  gulf  between  the  former  cries 
for  bread  and  the  sharply  formulated  claims  of  the 
present.  It  is  evident  that  the  appetite  of  the 
masses  has  grown  within  the  past  centuries,  and  the 
bill  which  they  intend  to  present  for  payment  will 
not  be  a  small  one. 

Who  will  be  required  to  pay  this  bill  ? 

Society,  most  certainly. 

Will  it  be  done  willingly  ? 

Evidently  not. 

Consequently  there  will  be  complications,  quarrels, 
civil  wars. 

Certainly  there  will  be  serious  complications;  they 
are  already  casting  their  shadows  before  them  in  the 
shape  of  disturbances  of  a  socialistic  character  that 
are  originating  here  and  there.  In  America,  most 
likely,  those  disturbances  are  lesser  and  less  pointed, 
but  in  Europe,  in  France  and  Belgium,  for  instance, 
such  disorders  assume  a  very  threatening  aspect. 

Who  is  likely  to  be  victorious  in  this  struggle? 

Unless  Napoleon  I.  was  wrong  in  his  assertion 
that  victory  will  always  remain  with  the  gros  batail- 
lons ,  the  “regulators”  will  win.  Their  numbers 
will  be  very  great ;  whoever  knows  human  nature 
will  understand  that  all  such  as  have  not  much  to 
lose  will,  at  the  decisive  moment,  join  the  claims  of 
those  who  have  nothing  to  lose. 


Realism. 


27 


It  is  generally  supposed  that  the  danger  is  not  so 
imminent  yet  ;  but,  as  far  as  I  was  able  to  judge, 
the  impendence  of  the  danger  varies  in  different 
countries.  France,  for  instance — that  long-suffering 
country  which  is  forever  experimenting  on  herself, 
whether  it  be  in  social  or  scientific  questions,  or  in 
politics — is  the  nearest  to  a  crisis ;  then  follow 
Belgium  and  other  countries. 

It  is  very  possible  that  even  the  present  genera¬ 
tion  will  witness  something  serious  in  .that  respect. 
As  to  the  coming  generations,  there  is  no  doubt 
that  they  will  assist  at  a  thorough  reconstruction 
of  the  social  structure  in  all  countries. 

The  claims  of  socialists,  and,  particularly,  the 
anarchists,  as  well  as  the  disorders  incited  by  them 
generally  produce  a  great  sensation  in  society.  But 
no  sooner  are  the  disorders  suppressed,  than  society 
relapses  again  into  its  usual  unconcern,  and  no  one 
gives  a  thought  to  the  fact  that  the  frequency  of 
those  painful  symptoms,  recurring  with  so  much 
persistency,  is  in  itself  a  sign  of  disease. 

Far-seeing  people  begin  to  realize  that  palliative 
measures  are  of  no  more  use  ;  that  a  change  of 
governments  and  of  rulers  will  not  avail  any  more  ; 
and  that  nothing  is  left  but  to  await  developments 
contingent  on  the  attitude  of  the  opposed  parties — 
the  energetic  determination  of  the  well-to-do  classes, 
not  to  yield,  and  that  of  the  proletaires,  to  keep 
their  courage  and  persevere. 

******* 


28 


Reatism . 


The  only  consolation  remaining  to  the  rich  con¬ 
sists  in  the  fact  that  the  “  regulators  ”  have  not  had 
time  yet  to  organize  their  forces  for  a  successful 
struggle  with  society.  This  is  true  to  a  certain  ex¬ 
tent.  But,  though  they  do  it  slowly,  the  “  regula¬ 
tors”  are  perfecting  their  organization  all  the  time  : 
yet,  on  the  other  hand,  can  we  say  that  society  is  well 
enough  organized  not  to  stand  in  dread  of  attacks  ? 

Who  are  the  recognized  and  official  defenders  of 
society  ? 

The  Army  and  the  Church. 

A  soldier,  there  is  no  doubt  of  it,  is  a  good  sup¬ 
port,  he  represents  a  solid  defense;  the  only  trouble 
about  him  is  that  the  soldier  himself  begins  to  get 
weary  of  his  ungrateful  part.  It  is  likely  that  for 
many  years  to  come  yet  the  soldier  will  shoot  with 
a  light  heart  at  such  as  are  called  his  “  enemies  ” ; 
but  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  he  will  refuse  to 
shoot  at  his  own  people. 

Who  is  a  good  soldier?  Only  one  to  whom  you 
can  point  out  his  father,  his  mother,  or  his  brother 
in  the  crowd,  saying,  “  those  are  enemies  of  society, 
kill  them  ” — and  who  will  obey. 

I  may  remark  here,  in  passing,  that  it  occurred  to 
me  to  refer  to  this  idea  in  a  conversation  I  had  with 
the  well-known  French  writer  and  thinker,  Alexander 
Dumas,  fils,  and  with  what  success?  Conceding  the 
justice  of  the  apprehension,  he  had  no  other  com¬ 
forting  suggestion  to  offer  than  to  say  :  “  Oh,  yes, 

the  soldier  will  shoot  yet!  ” 


Realism. 


29 


The  other  defender  of  society,  the  priest,  has  been 
less  ill-used  than  the  soldier,  and  consequently  he  is 
not  so  tired  of  his  task :  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
people  begin  to  tire  of  him,  less  heed  is  paid  to  his 
words,  and  there  arises  a  doubt  as  to  the  truth  of  all 
that  he  preaches. 

There  was  a  time  when  it  was  possible  to  tell 
the  people  that  there  is  but  one  sun  in  the  heavens 
as  there  is  but  one  God-appointed  king  in  the  coun¬ 
try.  As  stars  of  the  first,  second,  third  and  fourth 
magnitude  are  grouping  themselves  around  the  sun, 
so  the  powerful,  the  rich,  the  poor,  and  the  miserable, 
surround  the  king  on  earth.  And,  as  all  that  ap¬ 
peared  plausible,  people  used  to  believe  that  such 
arrangements  are  as  they  ought  to  be.  All  was  ac¬ 
cepted,  all  went  on  smoothly:  none  of  such  things 
can  be  advanced  nowadays,  however ;  no  one  will  be 
ready  to  believe  in  them. 

*  *  ¥r  ¥r  #  *  * 

Clearly,  things  assume  a  serious  aspect  :  Suppose 
the  day  comes  when  the  priests  will  entirely  lose 
their  hold  on  the  people,  when  the  soldiers  will  turn 
their  guns  muzzles  down — where  will  society  look 
for  bulwarks  then  ?  Is  it  possible  that  it  has  no 
more  reliable  defense  ? 

Certainly,  it  has  such  a  defense,  and  it  is  nothing 
else  but  talents ,  and  their  representatives,  in  science, 
literature,  and  art  in  all  its  ramifications. 

Art  must  and  will  defend  society.  Its  influence 
is  less  apparent  and  palpable,  but  it  is  very  great  ;  it 


30 


Realism. 


might  even  be  said  that  its  influence  over  the  minds, 
the  hearts,  and  the  actions  of  people,  is  enormous, 
unsurpassed,  unrivaled.  Art  must  and  will  defend 
society  with  all  the  more  care  and  earnestness,  because 
its  devotees  know  that  the  “  regulators  ”  are  not  dis¬ 
posed  to  give  them  the  honorable,  respectable  posi¬ 
tion  they  occupy  now — since,  according  to  them,  a 
good  pair  of  boots  is  more  useful  than  a  good  picture, 
a  novel,  or  a  statue.  Those  people  declare  that  talent 
is  luxury  ;  that  talent  is  aristocratic,  and  that,  con¬ 
sequently,  talent  has  to  be  brought  down  from  its 
pedestal  to  the  common  level — a  principle  to  which 
we  shall  never  submit. 

Let  us  not  deceive  ourselves  :  there  will  arise  new 
talents,  which  will  gradually  adapt  themselves  to 
new  conditions,  if  such  will  prevail,  and  their  works 
may  perhaps  gain  from  it,  but  we  shall  not  agree 
to  the  principle  of  general  demolition  and  recon¬ 
struction,  when  such  have  no  other  foundation  but 
the  well  known  thesis :  “  Let  us  destroy  every¬ 

thing  and  clear  the  ground  ;  as  to  the  reconstruc¬ 
tion — about  that  we  shall  see  later  on.”  We  shall 
defend  and  advocate  the  improvement  of  the  exist¬ 
ing  things  by  means  of  peaceful  and  gradual 
measures. 

******* 

It  goes  without  the  saying  that  we  demand  that 
society,  on  its  side,  should  help  us  to  fulfill  our  task  • 
that  it  should  trust  us,  give  us  all  the  freedom  neces¬ 
sary  for  the  development  and  exertion  of  talents. 


Realism . 


3i 


There  is  the  rub ! 

Well-fed,  self-satisfied  society  quails  at  every 
change,  at  every  blame,  derision  and  comment ;  it 
distrusts  the  foremost,  daring  representatives  of 
science,  literature  and  art.  Society  strives  jealously 
to  retain  the  right  not  only  to  point  out  the  road  for 
talent,  but  even  to  regulate  the  measure,  the  degree 
of  its  development  and  its  manifestation. 

In  this  society  of  ours  anything  that  is  common 
and  conventional  is  shielded  by  all  kinds  of  rights 
and  privileges,  while  anything  that  is  new  and  orig¬ 
inal  is  bound  to  awaken  animosity  and  censure, 
has  to  go  through  a  severe  struggle  under  the  press¬ 
ure  of  wide-spread  cant  and  hypocrisy. 

Try  to  create  anything  ingenious  in  any  of  the 
regions  of  science  and  literature,  try  to  present  in 
graphic  or  plastic  form  the  most  original,  striking 
conception,  but  only  forget  or  refuse  to  surround  it 
with  the  conventional  layer  of  triviality  and  vulgar¬ 
ity  so  dear  to  the  heart  of  society,  you  will  be  done 
for,  you  will  not  even  obtain  a  hearing,  you  will  be 
called  a  charlatan,  if  nothing  worse  than  that. 

Why  is  that  so?  Was  it  society  that  has  shown 
the  way  to  all  great  discoveries  ?  No,  it  has  always 
detained  them,  has  always  put  breaks  on  them. 

Has  society,  in  its  collective  form,  ever  evoked 
any  of  the  great  manifestations  of  art  or  literature  ? 
No ;  society  was  always  eager  to  worry,  to  persecute 
men  of  talent,  though  it  was  erecting  monuments  to 
them  after  their  death. 


32 


Realism . 


How  did  society  come  to  display  such  arrogance 
and  presumption  ?  It  was  tempted  that  way  only 
by  the  unchristian  conviction  that  “the  aim  justifies 
the  means.” 

******* 

Can  there  be  anything  more  exasperating  than 
the  conversations  we  hear  sometimes : 

“  Have  you  been  at  the  ‘  Salon  V  ” 

“  No,  we  did  not  happen  to  go  there  this  year,  but 
last  year  we  were  there  more  than  once.” 

There  is  irony  here  as  well  as  truth,  since,  in  the 
majority  of  cases,  you  will  find  in  the  “  Salon  ”  the 
same  number  of  pictures  nearly  of  the  same  quality, 
treating  on  nearly  the  same  subjects,  and,  most 
assuredly,  painted  nearly  in  the  same  style. 

“  Have  you  seen  the  new  play  of  Sardou  ?  ” 

“  Just  imagine,  could  not  possibly  get  to  see  it  yet, 
had  to  go  to  the  country ;  but  then  to-morrow  we 
go  to  the  Comedie  Franqaise  to  see  that  new  thing  of 
Dumas.  They  say  both  plays  are  very  much  alike 
in  their  conception,  as  well  as  in  their  plot.”  And 
this  is  perfectly  true ;  they  are  doubtlessly  more  or 
less  alike. 

Whose  fault  is  this  then,  if  not  the  authors’  ? 

No.  Ask  the  playwrights  whether  they  would 
dare  to  represent  the  action  in  such  a  way  as  it  has 
been  suggested  to  them  by  real  life,  with  its  logical 
conclusion,  made  unavoidable  by  the  march  of 
events,  omitting,  for  once,  the  long  established, 
hackneyed,  conventional  termination? 


Realism . 


33 


“  No,”  the  authors  would  tell  you,  “  such  a  thing 
is  not  to  be  thought  of,”  and  they  will  be  in  the 
right.  Society,  weighed  down  by  cant,  will  not  go 
to  see  such  a  play,  however  interesting  it  may  be ; 
so  the  author  has  to  humor  the  public  if  he  does 
not  want  to  bring  ruin  on  his  manager  and  on  him¬ 
self. 

The  same  is  the  case  with  artists,  sculptors, 
even  composers.  What  a  great  number  of  favorites 
of  the  Muses  have  been  driven  into  early  graves  by 
the  animosity  of  the  public  to  all  new  construction 
of  poetical  as  well  as  musical  ideas  ! 

On  one  side  we  hear  complaints  of  the  dullness, 
the  monotony,  even  the  triviality  prevailing  in  art  ; 
people  clamor  for  something  inspired,  something 
original  ;  on  the  other  side,  the  same  public  arbi¬ 
trarily  chastises  you  for  all  that  fails  to  come  within 
the  range  of  the  established,  conventional  ideas ! 

It  is  high  time,  it  seems  to  me,  to  understand 
the  necessity  of  treating  art  with  tolerance  and  con¬ 
fidence,  if  we  want  it  to  fraternize  with  society,  to 
become  as  one  with  it,  to  serve  it  faithfully  and 
well  in  the  present  troubled  times  when  the  poet 
and  the  artist  are  soldiers  on  their  posts. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

“  But  look  here  you,  representative  of  art,”  I 
might  be  asked,  “what  are  the  tidings  that  you  are 
so  eager  to  announce  to  us—  ,vhat  are  your  dis¬ 
coveries  that  would  be  so  entirely  new  to  society  ?  ” 
Well,  what  we  should  say  would,  perhaps,  not  be 


3 


34 


Realism. 


news,  yet  certainly  the  idea  of  it  has  not  yet  pene¬ 
trated  the  consciousness  of  the  people.  Armed 
with  the  rich,  varied  resources  of  art  we  will  tell  peo¬ 
ple  some  truths. 

“  Give  up,”  we  shall  say  to  them,  “  give  up  enjoy¬ 
ing  yourselves  amidst  the  illusions  of  the  idealism 
which  lulls  your  senses,  of  the  idealism  of  high- 
sounding  words  and  phrases.  Look  around  you 
through  the  eye  of  sensible  realism,  and  you  will 
acquire  the  certitude  of  your  mistake.  You  are  not 
the  Christians  you  assume  yourselves  to  be.  You 
are  not  representatives  of  Christian  societies,  of 
Christian  countries.” 

Those  that  kill  their  kind  by  the  hundred  thousand 
are  no  Christians. 

Those  that  are  always  moved,  in  private  as  well 
as  in  public  life,  by  the  principle  of  “  eye  for  eye, 
and  tooth  for  tooth,”  are  no  Christians. 

Those  that  spend  many  hours  of  their  lives  in 
churches,  yet  who  give  nothing,  or  next  to  nothing, 
to  the  poor,  are  no  Christians. 

What  have  you  done  with  the  decree  of  the 
Saviour  concerning  Christian  humility  and  to  help 
such  as  are  in  real  need  ? 

What  is  the  stand  taken  now,  let  us  ask,  by  those 
two  great  branches  of  the  administration  of  Christ’s 
Church,  that  call  themselves  the  Roman  Catholic 
and  the  Orthodox  churches,  which  have  once  sepa¬ 
rated,  thanks  to  their  inability  to  agree  as  to 
whether  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeded  frorr  the  Father 


Realism . 


35 


and  the  Son  or  from  the  Father  alone?  Is  it  pos¬ 
sible  that  they  have  not  come  yet  to  an  understand¬ 
ing,  and,  blinded  by  mutual  hatred,  are  neglecting 
the  loftiness  of  their  mission  on  earth  ? 

What  is  the  stand  taken  by  those  new  churches 
originated  of  late,  comparatively  speaking,  on  the 
plea  of  a  more  realistic  understanding  of  the  con¬ 
nection  of  life  with  its  Originator  ?  Is  it  possible 
that,  having  concluded  the  fight  with  their  great 
adversary,  those  churches  have  also  drifted  into  a 
sweet  nap  over  the  existing  order  of  things,  and 
have  also  renounced  taking  a  hand  in  any  further 
reforms? 

Well,  if  it  be  so,  let  men  of  talent  shake  the 
strong  and  the  powerful  out  of  the  somnolence  into 
which  they  have  fallen  ;  a  difficult  task  it  will  be, 
but  a  noble  one.  And  if,  we  are  refused  a  hearing, 
or  attempts  are  made  to  muzzle  us,  why,  the  worse 
it  will  be  for  society.  Rouse  itself  it  shall  ;  but  it 
will  be  too  late — the  “Vandals  will  have  burned 
Rome  ”  once  again.  We  may  be  assured  that  no 
churches,  no  bankers’  offices  will  then  be  spared. 

“  If  any  man  have  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear.” 


I5H7-  J2<f 


I 


NOIV  READY, 

Revised  Edition ,  with  much  new  matter  added . 


VERESTCHAGIN, 

Painter,  Soldier,  Traveler, 

BY 

VASSILI  VERESTCHAGIN. 

TRANSLATED  BY 

F.  H.  PETERS,  M.A. 

Illustrated  with  many  original  sketches  by  the  Author. 


PRICE,  ONE  DOLLAR. 


For  sale  at  the  Pennsylvania  Academy  of  the 
Fine  Arts,  and  by  Booksellers. 


